Still pushing the alarm barrow uphill

The ‘extreme far left’ newspaper The Guardian has, to borrow Paddy’s phrase, ‘gone off on a rant’ about the climate again.

“Humans are pushing the Earth closer to a climate cliff”

The article is written by Dr John Abraham who is a professor of thermal sciences and who researches in climate monitoring and renewable energy generation for the developing world.? So he should know what he is talking about, right?

His article is reporting on a new study?which examines potential climate feedbacks that could push Earth into a ?hothouse? state. Quote. Read more »

The science is settled?

We are told constantly that, with respect to Climate Change, the science is settled.

Yet, every time someone looks at that settled science we find lies, mistakes and obfuscation. The science is far from settled, especially when that science uses manipulated data.

A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA?s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented ?global warming??by tampering with the raw temperature data records.

Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a retired geologist and data computation expert. He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all?NASA GISS?s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA?s revisions, you?ll find that?since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

According to G?nter Ederer, the German journalist who has reported on Ewert?s findings:

From the publicly available data, Ewert made an unbelievable discovery: Between the years 2010 and 2012 the data measured since 1881 were altered so that they showed a significant warming, especially after 1950. [?] A comparison of the data from 2010 with the data of 2012 shows that?NASA-GISS had altered its own datasets so that especially after WWII a clear warming appears ??although it never existed. ? Read more »

Now hang on a minute, this doesn’t make sense

Screen Shot 2016-01-22 at 12.42.00 PM

Apparently climate change is to blame for a lake in Bolivia drying up.

Or so a scientist says. What this is, in reality, is another manipulative alarmist article blaming something on climate change that is unsupported by the facts.

Overturned fishing skiffs lie abandoned on the shores of what was Bolivia’s second-largest lake. Beetles dine on bird carcasses and gulls fight for scraps under a glaring sun in what marshes remain.

Lake Poopo was officially declared evaporated last month. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people have lost their livelihoods and gone.

High on Bolivia’s semi-arid Andean plains at 3,700 metres (more than 12,000 feet) and long subject to climatic whims, the shallow saline lake has essentially dried up before only to rebound to twice the area of Los Angeles.

But recovery may no longer be possible, scientists say.

“This is a picture of the future of climate change,” says Dirk Hoffman, a German glaciologist who studies how rising temperatures from the burning of fossil fuels has accelerated glacial melting in Bolivia.

As Andean glaciers disappear so do the sources of Poopo’s water. But other factors are in play in the demise of Bolivia’s second-largest body of water behind Lake Titicaca.

Read more »

NASA: ?Impossible to deny climate change?; Nobody is denying it, we?re just not convinced it?s humans who are to blame

Nobody is denying it, we?re just not convinced it?s humans who are to blame.

It’s impossible to deny climate change following the record breaking temperatures last year, a scientist from the American space agency NASA says.

Compton Tucker told RNZ News there was every reason to believe that 2016 would break last year’s record.

“We’re starting to see the death of climate change denial, that is the evidence accumulated from multiple sources.

“The evidence is overwhelming and there are people who are wilfully ignorant about climate change and they invoke a wide variety of mechanisms which are pretty silly.”

New Zealand climate scientist James Renwick said countries needed to start getting on top of greenhouse gas emissions.

He said the global economy was built on fossil fuels and that couldn’t be changed overnight.

“There are very rapid changed changes in renewable technologies, electric vehicles and so on and that’s great, but to really change the direction of the global economy in terms of how energy’s produced is a big ask and it will take time. The thing is we really need to start.”

Dr Renwick said there had been talk about this problem for 25 years and nothing had happened – but he said wasn’t too late to turn things around.

He said New Zealand’s emissions profile was unusual, with almost half coming from the agricultural sector.

However, the biggest growth areas for emissions came from the transport and energy sectors. ? Read more »

Uh oh, looks like the math was wrong, way wrong on climate models

The Climate Change debate is over…the science is really settled now…and in settling it it shows that the math was wrong in all the models.

A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.

A former climate modeller for the Government?s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.

He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.

He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate?s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.

It turns out the UN?s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.

?Yes, CO2 has an effect, but it?s about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decades?.

Dr Evans says his discovery ?ought to change the world?.

?But the political obstacles are massive,? he said. ? Read more »

Climate warmists upset no one is taking them seriously

I?m sure it has nothing to do with climate science being a scam and scientists being seen as agenda pushing troughers. ??

Besides, apart from a few low lying places getting wet feet, a warming planet is great news. ?

But the push is on to convince us otherwise.

Climate change is predicted to bring us higher sea levels, more extreme weather and a world of other catastrophic consequences – but when it comes making people act, the answer may lie in accentuating the positive rather than the negative.

In a comprehensive study published today in major journal Nature Climate Change, 28 researchers from around the world examined which factors were most likely to result in people taking action.

More than 6000 people across the 24 participating countries were surveyed about their climate change beliefs and pro-environmental actions, and also whether climate change actions would result in co-benefits such as reduced pollution, increased economic development or a more caring and ethical community.

The team found that co-benefits were a powerful motivator for people, even for those unconcerned or unconvinced about climate change. ? Read more »

Patrick Moore: ‘no scientific proof’ climate change is manmade

One of the original founders of Greenpeace, who quit the organisation in disgust,?has?said that humans are not to blame for climate change:

There is no scientific proof of man-made global warming and a hotter earth would be ?beneficial for humans and the majority of other species?, according to a founding member of environmental campaign group Greenpeace.

The assertion was made by Canadian ecologist Patrick Moore, a member of Greenpeace from 1971 to 1986, to U.S senators on Tuesday.

He told The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee: ?There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth?s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists.?

Moore pointed out that there was an Ice Age 450million years ago when CO2 was 10 times higher.

He said: ?There is some correlation, but little evidence, to support a direct causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature through the millennia. The fact that we had both higher temperatures and an ice age at a time when CO2 emissions were 10 times higher than they are today fundamentally contradicts the certainty that human-caused CO2 emissions are the main cause of global warming.?

Even if the earth does warm up, Moore claims that it will be to the advantage of humans and other forms of life, as ?humans are a tropical species?.

Read more »

A newspaper doesn’t know its weather from its climate [UPDATED]

A new climate report has revealed just how extreme last month was in the weather books – not that the rain-soaked residents of Whanganui, Manawatu and Dunedin, or the owners of frozen South Island farms needed any reminding.

A report card issued today by the National Institute of Water and Atmosphere described June as being unsettled on the whole, with storm events affecting different parts of the country.

Along with devastating floods that forced a state of emergency to be declared, temperature gauges in parts of the South Island recorded three of the lowest temperatures ever experienced in New Zealand.

Rainfall was more than the double the June normal in Whanganui, Palmerston North, Central Otago, while Dunedin was drenched in more than three times its normal total for the month.

Instruments set up in the Dunedin suburb of Musselburgh recorded 194ml for the month – 335 per cent of normal – while Dunedin Airport, further out from the city, recorded 158ml. Read more »


Are there any climate records we can believe anymore?

James Delingpole discusses the latest climate fraud, the ongoing alteration of the climate record of NOAA and NASA, sometime by up to 35%.

He believes the records are now so hopelessly tampered with that they can no longer be relied upon and are in fact a massive fraud.

When you Google ?Dr Kevin Cowtan? he appears reassuringly neutral in this affair. He works in the Department of Chemistry at the University of York, his current speciality being X-ray crystallography. A proper scientist, then, with no dog in this fight. Or so it looks until you scroll down a bit and see that his other area of research is ?climate science.?

My climate science research focuses primarily on problems which are relevant to the public understanding of climate science. With my colleague Robert Way I have been investigating biases in historical temperature record from weather stations. Our?primary work concerns temperature change over the past two decades. The main temperature record providers show a slowdown in the rate of warming over this period, however when biases in the temperature record are taken into account, we find that part of the slowdown disappears.

I am also involved in climate science communication, and am contributing to a massive online course run by the University of Queensland. I can offer undergraduate projects in this area for students who are interested to develop science communication skills.

So, not a neutral party after all then, but someone who depends for part of his livelihood on the lavish funding available in academe for those who promote the climate ?consensus.? Perhaps, in the interests of full disclosure, he might have mentioned this detail on his YouTube biography. But I mean that only as a very mild and largely inconsequential criticism. What matters is not what Cowtan does for a living (?the motive fallacy?) but whether or not he has got his facts right.

And according to this counterblast from Dave Burton ? a US computer programmer, sea level specialist and IPCC expert reviewer on AR5 ?? he hasn?t.

Burton?s key point is this: where Cowtan claims that all NOAA?s adjustments have done is increased warming by a modest 3 per cent, in actuality they have increased it by 35 per cent. So, far from Cowtan?s assessment that these adjustments are ?inconsequentially tiny?, they are in fact quite massively distorting.

Might it be that they reached such wildly different conclusions by using different data? Er, no. Burton reached his conclusions by creating a spreadsheet with decadal data digitized from the exact graph used in Cowtan?s video.

Read more »

Christopher Booker destroys the Met Office

If?only we had someone in the NZ media that could have a crack at NIWA like Christopher Booker has?just done in the Telegraph to the Met Office over their wonky predictions over climate change.

Five years after we paid ?33?million to buy the Met Office a new computer, we are now to pay ?97?million to give them a ?world-leading super-computer? ? described by its chairman as ?our integrated weather and climate model, known as the Met Office Unified Model?. That?s because it will not only ?produce the most accurate short-term forecasts that are scientifically possible?, but can also predict how the Earth?s climate will change over the next 100 years.

I scarcely need remind readers of how the Met Office?s computer modelling has performed in the past 10 years. In 2004, it predicted that by 2014 the world would have warmed by 0.8C, and that four of the five years after 2009 would beat the 1998 record as the ?hottest year ever?. In 2007, its computer predicted that this would be the ?warmest year ever?, just before global temperatures temporarily plummeted by 0.7C, equal to their entire net rise in the 20th century. That summer in the UK, it told us, would be ?drier than average?, just before some of the worst floods in living memory.

From 2008 to 2010 the models consistently predicted ?warmer than average? winters and ?hotter and drier summers?: three years when much of the northern hemisphere endured record winter cold and snow; while in the UK, as in that promised ?barbecue summer? of 2009, we had summers wetter and cooler than usual. A particular triumph, in October 2010, was the prediction that our winter would be up to ?2C warmer than average?, just before the coldest December since records began in 1659. ? Read more »